Congress Takes New Look at Superfund's Many Woes Only 54 of More Than 1,200 Sites on Priority List Have Been Made Safe

Article excerpt

IT seemed relatively simple in 1980: Identify the few hundred
hazardous-waste sites around the country, charge the polluters a
fee, and clean up the sites. End of problem.

But the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act, or "Superfund," has become an environmental,
bureaucratic, and political nightmare. The list of potential
problem sites has grown to about 35,000 and continues to grow. Of
the more than 1,200 or so worst sites (those on the "National
Priorities List"), just 54 have been cleaned up to the point at
which they are off the list. And only another 164 have had cleanup
construction completed despite tens of billions of dollars spent
from public and private sources.

Of those billions, most of the money - 70 percent by some
estimates - has gone for lawsuits, making it what some cynics call
"the attorneys' endowment fund."

"Superfund has become the program everybody loves to hate," says
Rep. Al Swift (D) of Washington, who chairs the House subcommittee
that deals with hazardous materials.

Carol Browner, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
administrator, points to some good results from the law: thousands
of short-term cleanups that have reduced public-health risks, more
voluntary efforts by businesses and municipalities to prevent
pollution, and the development of new hazardous-waste control and
cleanup technologies.
Cleanup cost staggering

Still, Ms. Browner said in recent Senate testimony: "The job we
face cleaning up hazardous-waste sites seems more formidable than
ever." By the time all sites are made safe, according to some
estimates, the total cost could reach $1 trillion.

Superfund - the largest EPA program - is up for congressional
reauthorization this year, and the way lawmakers deal with it in
coming months could affect most everyone in this country.

Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D) of New Jersey, who chairs the Senate
subcommittee that oversees the law, points out that 41 million
Americans live within four miles of a hazardous-waste site.

Much of the costs to date have gone to settle legal disputes
between corporations charged with pollution and their insurance
companies. Among the issues here is whether cleanup costs
constitute "damages" under liability-insurance policies.
Everyone affected

"The American legal system faces an environmental
liability-insurance crisis," Kenneth Abraham, a University of
Virginia law professor, told an American Bar Association meeting
last month. "It is a very substantial drag on the economy {which}
affects everybody because indirectly it adds to the cost of almost
everything."

Part of the problem, critics say, is that Superfund's principle
of "make the polluter pay" sweeps the relatively innocent and
blatantly guilty into the liability net. Its "joint, several, and
retroactive" provisions mean that minor parties can be just as
liable as major polluters. …